Bayesian reasoning in avalanche terrain: a theoretical investigation

In this article, I explore a Bayesian approach to avalanche decision-making. I motivate this perspective by highlighting a version of the base-rate fallacy and show that a similar pattern applies to decision-making in avalanche-terrain. I then draw out three theoretical lessons from adopting a Bayesian approach and discuss these lessons critically. Lastly, I highlight a number of challenges for avalanche educators when incorporating the Bayesian perspective in their curriculum.     

Whose curriculum is it anyway? Stakeholder salience in the context of Degree Apprenticeships

A Degree Apprenticeship model has recently been introduced into the United Kingdom (UK) Higher Education system as part of wider changes to vocational training. The system has experienced numerous rapid changes in regulation and funding, and it is now little understood by many stakeholders. Distinguishing different phases in UK Higher Education, and using a salience model as a lens for analysis, this article identifies and examines stakeholders with regards to their influence on the Higher Education curriculum. The new Degree Apprenticeship model is funded by an employer payroll levy and it requires Higher Education institutions to deliver training to specific standards. This research explores the implications of the model for the Higher Education curriculum, concluding that the direct involvement of employers in the design and delivery of vocational Higher Education introduces untried elements into UK Higher Education on the assumption that the funding requirement will lead to a change in employer behaviour. This, coupled with the opening of Higher Education provision to private providers, transfers power over the curriculum to those with potentially no commitment to wider public values, and may offer a threat to the international standing of UK Higher Education. This article contributes to research in understanding how Higher Education systems respond to, and actors cope with, imposed change.     

Who are We?

This article scrutinises the usage of the words “we”, “us” and “our” by BBC radio journalists when reporting and discussing news and current affairs. By analysing reports and discussions on the “flagship” Radio 4 Today, a daily news programme whose centrality to political and public debate is widely recognised, the article raises substantive questions about clarity, accuracy and impartiality in senior broadcast journalists’ choice of language. In exploring the assumptions which may underlie the invocation, via such language choices, of an implied community, and against the backdrop of the BBC's commitment to impartiality in its Editorial Guidelines, the article identifies numerous recent examples where the choice of words and identifiers can be seen as undermining the BBC's impartiality and which show several of its senior journalists adopting the first-person plural “we” when reporting on matters of public policy. The findings therefore indicate a general need to codify norms which are seen to integrate the need for accuracy as well as impartiality, and for these norms to take into account issues which might at first glance seem to be inconsequential, micro-level features of the journalists’ language. The evidence suggests that more fine-grained guidelines on permissible circumstances for BBC journalists’ usage of “we” and “our” need revising and disseminating in the light of these findings.     

Research and Training in Higher Education: The State of the Art

The author presents a tour d'horizon of the field of higher education studies, including research on higher education, citing the relevant publication series and journals dealing with the subject, the strongest institutions, worldwide, offering university level studies in the field, and the antecedents of the endeavour. It is growing in importance as higher education institutions and systems expand, diversify, and become increasingly complex, requiring more and better insights regarding themselves for various purposes. The field needs to more fully tap findings in parallel interdisciplinary fields and to publicize the results of private institutional endeavours such as institutional research. A very glowing prognosis for higher education studies is given.     

Can nightmares become sweet dreams? Peer review in the wake of a systemwide administrative mandate

In 1993, the Board of Governors of the University of North Carolina at Charlotte enacted a mandate requiring peer evaluation of teaching, including class-room observation, for non-tenured faculty. Participants involved in the AAHE Peer Review Project feared the mandate would taint efforts to introduce faculty to collegial approaches to the peer review of teaching. As reported here, negative fallout from the mandate has been balanced to some degree by the positive effects of having a required evaluation system. Departmental culture shaped peer review activities undertaken in the first year and may have ultimately overshadowed effects of the mandate on the project.Deborah M. Langsam is an Associate Professor of Biology at the University of North Carolina in Charlotte. A mycologist specializing in aquatic fungi, Langsam earned her baccalaureate degree from Brooklyn College, M.A. from the City University of New York, and her Ph.D. in botany from Duke University. She is also a winner of the NCNB Award for Teaching Excellence, serves as the UNCC campus project coordinator for the AAHE Peer Review of Teaching project, and has led numerous workshops on teaching portfolios. Philip L. Dubois is Provost and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte. A political scientist, Dubois earned his baccalaureate degree at the University of California at Davis and his M.A. and Ph.D. degrees at the University of Wisconsin, Madison. He assumed his current position at UNCC in 1991, after having served fifteen years in faculty and administrative posts at University of California-Davis.     

Predicting Academic Success: A Longitudinal Study of University Design Students

This article presents a longitudinal study, over eleven years, of the academic progress of a cohort of design students (n = 475) at a major Australian university. The students were from four different spatial design disciplines: architecture, industrial design, interior design, and landscape architecture. The article identifies cognitive variables that may predict future academic success. This research uses regression analysis to identify correlations across a range of variables, in particular exploring the relationship between university entrance scores, subjects studied at school (art and graphics) and academic success as defined by university grade point average and time to completion. This study shows that prior knowledge in art and graphics is not a useful predictor of future academic success, while university entrance scores and first year performance are related to ongoing academic success. These results suggest that for the design disciplines explored here, discipline‐specific prior knowledge is not an important requirement for university entrance.     

Congruence between mother and handicapped child's view of the child's sense of adjustment

The responses of 22 physically handicapped children to selected items of the Piers‐Harris Self Concept Scale for Children were compared with their mothers’ responses to equivalent items of the Personality Inventory for Children. The direction of the responses, whether children were more or less positive in self‐evaluation than mothers perceived them to. be, was analyzed with respect to sex of child, type of school attended, and diagnosis of handicap (cerebral palsy or spina bifida). Only diagnosis of handicap was significantly related to the tendency for children to be either less or more positive in response to the items than their mothers, with cerebral palsy children more positive and spina bifida children consistently less positive in direction. Possible explanations are considered, with particular reference to the children's views regarding peer relationships.     

Exploring the influence of gender and gaming competence on attitudes towards using instructional games

Digital games are evolving beyond the solitary context into a ubiquitous, social and collaborative experience. Addressing beliefs about technology and attitudes towards technology‐mediated processes is fundamental to the successful implementation of any innovation. In collaborative gaming, attitude towards gaming influences learners' interactions along the domain, technology and community dimensions. Building on various seminal works, an instrument was developed for measuring four components of attitude towards gaming—affective components, perceived control, perceived usefulness and behavioural components. The survey, including 21 statements each scored on a 5‐point Likert scale, was used with a sample of college students to investigate the influence of gender and gaming competence on attitude towards gaming. The pedagogical implications of the different attitude components are discussed in relation to game design and to the different interactions triggered by the gaming context.     

Relationships between student characteristics and self‐, peer and tutor evaluations of oral presentations

There are many influences on how assessors grade themselves and others. Oral presentations are useful for exploring such factors in peer, self‐ and tutor marked assessments, being rapidly completed and assessed, commonly used in HE and very difficult to anonymize. This opportunistic study examined the effects of gender and level of attainment on the triangulation of marks awarded to student presenters. Grades generated by peer assessment were associated more strongly with tutor‐awarded marks than those from self‐assessment. For self‐assessment there was a strong effect of gender (female students undervalued their performance compared with tutor grades). Peer assessment produced higher marks than from tutors, perhaps because of the close‐knit community developed during residential courses. For tutor marks, the greatest variability was at the lower end of the scale, whereas peer assessors were most variable when marking students who self‐evaluated or peer assessed highly. Students awarded a narrower range of marks to peers compared with tutors, but when self‐assessing used a larger range. Presentations by students who admitted to little sleep the night before received lower grades from both peers and tutors, but this was not reflected by self‐assessments, suggesting they were unaware of their poorer performances. Sessions with fewer talks (four rather than seven) reduced the ‘dip’ in marks previously observed in the middle of sessions. Findings are discussed in the context of bias in this mode of assessment.